'Conscious Consumption' and Activism: An Empirical Reevaluation of the Apolitical and Distracted Consumer Author: Margaret Mary Willis Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/986 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2009 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. Boston College The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Department of Sociology ‘CONSCIOUS CONSUMPTION’ AND ACTIVISM: AN EMPIRICAL REEVALUATION OF THE APOLITICAL AND DISTRACTED CONSUMER A thesis by MARGARET M. WILLIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts May 2009 © copyright by MARGARET M. WILLIS 2009 ABSTRACT ‘Conscious Consumption’ and Activism: An Empirical Reevaluation of the Apolitical and Distracted Consumer Margaret M. Willis Advisor: Juliet B. Schor Reader: Natalia Sarkisian This thesis empirically examines the long-standing critique that consumption is inherently apolitical and a distraction from civic and political involvement. This image of consumers has been particularly salient in current debates about ‘conscious consumption’ motivated by ecological and social justice issues. Whether buying organic or fair-trade actually displaces activism has remained unsubstantiated. Based on the results of an online survey administered to a group of individuals who identify as conscious consumers, regression analyses were conducted to isolate the relationship between conscious consumption and formal and informal activism for over 1700 respondents. The results of the analyses reveal that higher levels of consistency in conscious consumption practices are significantly related to greater social and political involvement on ecological and social justice issues, even when controlling for prior levels of involvement. Respondents also reported higher overall participation rates in general when compared to pre-existing data on nationally representative samples. Consumption is not displacing involvement and activism among these conscious consumers, suggesting that conscious consumption may be an integral element of broader action for many. Conscious Consumption 1 ‘Conscious Consumption’ and Activism: An Empirical Reevaluation of the Apolitical and Distracted Consumer Conscious consumption, understood as choices to reduce or alter consumption that are conscientiously made and motivated by values, has a contested role in both public and scholarly discourse. What has been called the “New Consumer Movement” (Schor 2011a) is comprised of individuals and organizations committed to the belief that conscious consumption can effect change in sustainability and social justice movements. However, the legitimacy of consumption as such is undermined by the long-standing portrayal of consumption as either inherently apolitical or as individualizing and distracting from broader political aims. The aim of this paper is to reassess these deep assumptions about consumption using the results of a survey about the consumption and political practices of a group of conscious consumers in the US. … According to Schor (2011a), the “new consumer movement” (NCM) is comprised of both individual consumers and organizations that are attempting to change the patterns and culture of consumption, and has goals that substantially overlap with ecological sustainability movements and social justice movements (which themselves are often united in their goals and growing more so). To reach the goals of sustainability and justice, 1 the NCM is “address[ing] both the volume of consumption, and the particular choices of products and patterns of consumption made by individuals and households” (Schor 2011a: 3). 1 Among other goals, such as changing fast-paced lifestyles by reducing work time and re-valuing relationships and community. Conscious Consumption 2 There is much debate, however, over the NCM’s claim that changes in consumer culture and practices can effect the kind of far-reaching change that conscious consumers are seeking. Specifically, critics claim that conscious consumption will fail because of the individualizing nature of consumption – that conscious consumption displaces political activism 2 and therefore distracts attention from the need for institutional- and policy-level change (as in Maniates 2002). Without institutional or policy change, changes in individual practices may not really be able to have an impact given that individual practices themselves become constrained by the institutional and policy structures. Others go further to claim that consumer action in the marketplace is not only individualizing – it is inherently incapable of being political or effecting change because of the ability of the market to apply the same capitalist logic to the consumers’ dissent by turning it into a profitable market niche (Heath and Potter 2004; Smith 1998; Holt 2002). In these critiques, which will be discussed at greater length below, it is assumed that the consumer will not be able to decipher or challenge the “false promises” of the marketer and that the consumer will not think about sustainability after leaving the checkout aisle. These doubts about the efficacy of conscious consumption emerge from pervasive theories about the nature of consumer culture and the underlying relationship between consumption and other forms of political and social activism. These theories, which will be explored in the following pages, have been hugely influential in scholarly literature as well as in the current public discourse, including leftist and liberal critiques (Soper 2004). Whether conscious consumption actually distracts from or displaces other forms of political and social activism remains an open, empirical question. There is a dearth of 2 The terms “activism,” “action,” “involvement” are used synonymously throughout the paper. Conscious Consumption 3 empirical research on the phenomenon of conscious consumption and its interaction with more traditional political and social involvement (Stolle and Hooge 2003), particularly in the US. Broad swaths of alternative or political consumer practices have been empirically investigated in other countries focusing in part on the relationship between the consumer practices and other forms of social and political engagement (Andersen and Tobiasen 2004; Forno and Ceccarini 2006). Research on US populations has been limited largely to smaller-scale qualitative research on particular genres of consumption (e.g. Thompson and Coskunner-Balli’s 2007 ethnographic research on a small community supported agriculture group). While this research contributes to our understanding of the meaning of conscious consumption among certain groups, there is to date no quantitative empirical work on the overall trends within a group of conscious consumers, particularly with respect to the contested relationship between consumption and traditional or informal political participation. This research project seeks to fill this gap in the literature. Based on survey data collected from an online listserv of individuals who are, to varying extents, interested in conscious consumption and issues of sustainability, descriptive statistics and regression analyses are used to explore the relationship between conscious consumption and political or social involvement, and to assess whether acts of conscious consumption displace or coexist with broader activism on issues of sustainability and social justice among the respondents. This work is not assessing the veracity of the green or ethical claims of products and whether businesses are profiteering from well-intentioned (but ‘misled’) consumers who will buy their “green-washed” products (for example, Michael Pollan’s 2001 work Conscious Consumption 4 on “Industrial Organic,” or Seidman’s 2007 work on monitoring). Nor is this work able to assert in any other way that conscious consumption is an effective route to change. Rather, the focus of this paper is to assess the long-standing assumptions about consumption that have come to be prominent in the critique of conscious consumption. The Case Against Consumption There are deep cultural and theoretical obstacles to taking consumption seriously as a political or social change-related act. The view that consumer culture is a diversion rather than an active or resistive force itself repeats throughout critical scholarly literature. Scholarly work has long had a productivist bias (for example, the work of Karl Marx), where production is taken seriously and consumption is positioned as lesser: less useful, less rational, less masculine (Sassatelli 2007). 3 From a Frankfort School perspective, Adorno and Horkheimer (1944) proffered their influential analysis of the “culture industries,” in which corporations grow more powerful as consumers lose their capacity to resist through the “circle of manipulation and retroactive need” and mass production of culture: consumption homogenizes as it distracts from real issues of power. In Galbraith’s (1958) description of the dependence effect, he argued that consumers’ wants are entirely created by producers. These portrayals of manipulated consumers often underlie the view that seeking social or political change through the market is ineffective. The ability of the market to co-opt consumer resistance trumps the ability of the consumers to resist (e.g. Frank 1997; Holt 2002). As Holt notes: 3 Of course, while production is prioritized in society, it needs consumers. Consumption is alternately